Competition in the Acquisition of Major Weapon Systems
Legislative Perspectives
ResearchPublished 1976
Legislative Perspectives
ResearchPublished 1976
Examines the prospect of promoting greater competition in the acquisition of major weapons systems from the perspective of the Congress. Congressional support for the use of competition derives from its promise of both direct and indirect benefits. The primary direct benefits are lower prices and greater technological achievement. An additional perceived benefit stems from the view that competition insures fairness. Factors militating against support for greater competition include increasing interest in interservice commonality, inherent antipathy toward efforts involving significant near-term expenditures, the evolution of defense spending into an important tool of social and economic policy, and the relationships of the Congress to the defense industry and the military. A hard sell of the net cost benefits of any advanced acquisition strategy will miss its mark if it is (1) repressive in terms of the flexibility it accords to the Congress, or (2) not supplemented by appeals to considerations other than cost savings.
This publication is part of the RAND report series. The report series, a product of RAND from 1948 to 1993, represented the principal publication documenting and transmitting RAND's major research findings and final research.
This document and trademark(s) contained herein are protected by law. This representation of RAND intellectual property is provided for noncommercial use only. Unauthorized posting of this publication online is prohibited; linking directly to this product page is encouraged. Permission is required from RAND to reproduce, or reuse in another form, any of its research documents for commercial purposes. For information on reprint and reuse permissions, please visit www.rand.org/pubs/permissions.
RAND is a nonprofit institution that helps improve policy and decisionmaking through research and analysis. RAND's publications do not necessarily reflect the opinions of its research clients and sponsors.